Mitt Romney on Immigration

Former Republican Governor (MA)

Vetoed in-state tuition; turn off the magnet

Q: In Massachusetts, you vetoed legislation to provide interstate tuition rates to the children of illegals. Gov. Perry signed the Texas Dream Act to do exactly that, arguing that it's better to get these kids an education and to get them jobs than to
consign them just to being a burden on the state.

ROMNEY: It's an argument I just can't follow, to go to the University of Texas, if you're an illegal alien, you get an in-state tuition discount. You know how much that is? That's $22,000 a year.
Four years of college, almost $100,000 discount if you are an illegal alien. If you are a US citizen from any one of the other 49 states, you have to pay $100,000 more. That doesn't make sense to me. And that kind of magnet draws people into this country
to get that education, to get the $100,000 break. It makes no sense. We have to turn off the magnet of extraordinary government benefits like a $100,000 discount for going to the University of Texas. That shouldn't be allowed. It makes no sense at all.

Of course a border fence; of course no free tuition

Q: How do Republicans attract Latino voters?

SANTORUM: You attract Latino voters by talking about the importance of immigration & the importance of having English as the official language of this country. [But we need to finish the border fence].

HUNTSMAN: We can secure the border through means of fences, but the H1B visa process is broken.

ROMNEY: The question began by saying how do we attract Latino voters. And the answer is by telling them what they know in their heart, which is they or thei
ancestors did not come here for a handout. If they came here for a handout, they'd be voting for Democrats. They came here for opportunity and freedom. And that's what we represent. And that's why we'll win collecting support from Latinos across the
country. With regards to illegal immigration, of course we build a fence and of course we do not give instate tuition credits to people who come here illegally. That only attracts people to come here and take advantage of America's great beneficence.

Build 2,600-mile fence with enough guards to secure it

Q: What would you consider enough to be able to declare the border safe?

A: Well, first, we ought to have a fence.

Q: The whole fence, 2,600 miles?

A: Yes. We've got to have a fence, or the technologically approved system to make sure
that we know who's coming into the country, number one. Number two, we ought to have enough agents to secure that fence and to make sure that people are coming over are caught. But the third thing [is to address employers attracting illegal immigrants].

Turn off the magnet that attracts immigrants

I learned this when I was with border patrol agents in San Diego, and they said, look, they can always get a ladder to go over the fence. And people will always run to the country. The reason they come in such great numbers is because we've left the
magnet on.

And I said, what do you mean, the magnet? And they said, when employers are willing to hire people who are here illegally, that's a magnet, and it draws them in. And sanctuary cities, giving tuition breaks to the kids of illegal aliens,
employers that knowingly hire people who are here illegally. Those things also have to be stopped.

If we want to secure the border, we have to make sure we have a fence, determining where people are, enough agents to oversee it, & turn off that magnet.
We can't talk about amnesty, we cannot give amnesty to those who have come here illegally.

We've got 4.7 million people waiting in line legally. Let those people come in first, and those that are here illegally, they shouldn't have a special deal.

I like legal immigration; let business determine visas

Q: In 2008, you said you favored allowing American companies to hire more skilled foreign workers. With unemployment at 9.1%, are you still for importing more foreign labor?

A: Well, of course not. We're not looking to bring people in for jobs that
can be done by Americans. But at the same time, we want to make sure that America welcomes the best and brightest in the world. If someone comes here and gets a PhD in physics, that's the person I'd like to staple a green card to their diploma, rather
than saying to them to go home. I want the best & brightest to be metered into the country based upon the needs of our employment sector & create jobs by bringing technology and innovation that comes from people around the world. I like legal immigration
I'd have the number of visas that we give to people here that come here legally, determined in part by the needs of our employment community. But we have to secure our border and crack down on those that bring folks here and hire here illegally.

Immigration practices are upside down: more hi-tech visas

We should eagerly welcome individuals from other countries who are educated & experienced. But our current immigration policies do not. In order for some foreign students to come to America to earn a degree in physics, for example, they have to agree to
LEAVE the US when their degree has been awarded. That doesn't make sense.

We follow the same deeply counterproductive course when we strictly limit the number of visas we award to scientists & technicians.
If we want to continue to lead the world in innovation, we need the most intelligent & educated individuals. What we now do instead is strictly limit how long and how many highly skilled foreign applicants can be admitted and how long they can stay.
At the same time, millions of people without these skills enter the country illegally. Our immigration practices are literally upside down. The best and the brightest wait in line to come here, but those with only little education are permitted to stay.

Ardent proponent of English immersion

Massachusetts once took pride in pioneering bilingual education. The concept made sense--many feared that foreign-language-speaking immigrant children would be left behind if they were thrust into a standard English-speaking classroom &
English-speaking society.

There were a number of advocates that remained fierce defenders of bilingual education. In speaking to immigrant parents, I was surprised to learn that many of them had wanted their child to attend regular
English-speaking classes.

I became even more ardent proponent of English immersion and sought to rapidly implement it throughout the state. Under the immersion program , recent immigrant children who spoke no or little English would initially receive
instruction in their native tongue, but would be moved into English instruction as soon as possible, Time and again, I heard from parents in the immigrant community who applauded the decision to scrap bilingual education in favor of English.

GovWatch: 2005: Called comprehensive reform “reasonable”

Top Romney Flip Flops: #5. Immigration:

In a November 2005 interview with the Boston Globe, he described immigration reform proposal advanced by McCain as “reasonable.”
He now denounces it as an “amnesty plan.” In December 2006, he signed agreement authorizing state troopers to round up illegal immigrants.

Source: GovWatch on 2008 campaign: “Top Ten Flip-Flops”
, Feb 5, 2008

Deport illegal immigrants in 90 days under the ideal setting

Q: You said that for a lot of illegal immigrants who are here, under your plan, we could deport many of them within 90 days. How could we do it that quickly?

A: My plan is this, which is for those that have come here illegally and are here illegally
today, no amnesty. Now, how do people return home? Under the ideal setting, at least in my view, you say to those who have just come in recently, we’re going to send you back home immediately, we’re not going to let you stay here. You just go back home.
For those that have been here, let’s say, five years, and have kids in school, you allow kids to complete the school year, you allow people to make their arrangements, and allow them to return back home.
Those that have been here a long time, with kids that have responsibilities here and so forth, you let stay enough time to organize their affairs and go home.

Found Z-visa & McCain-Kennedy bill to be offensive

The illegal immigrants are free to get in line with everyone else that wants to become a permanent resident or citizen. But no special pathway, no special deal that says because you’re here illegally, you get to stay here for the rest of your life.
That’s what I found to be so offensive with the Z visa, which was in the McCain-Kennedy bill. It said to all illegal aliens, unless you’re a criminal, you’re all allowed to stay here for $3,000 for the rest of your life. And that’s a mistake. Let us
have a fixed period of time--90 days for some, depending on their circumstances, others longer, to the end of the school year--even longer potentially. Do it in a humane & compassionate way, but say to those who have come here legally, you must return
home, you must get in line with everybody else who wants to come here. There are millions throughout the world who want to come to this country legally. It’s a wonderful privilege. But those that have come here illegally should not be given a better deal

FactCheck: Yes, his ads DID accuse McCain of “amnesty”

Romney was wrong when he denied that his attack ads described McCain’s immigration bill as “amnesty” for illegal aliens. Romney said, “I don’t describe your plan as amnesty in my ad. I don’t call it amnesty. What I say is [that McCain’s policy is] what
most people would say is a form of amnesty.”

In fact, Romney has been running an ad since Dec. 28 that says “McCain pushed to let every illegal immigrant stay here permanently” while Romney “opposes amnesty for illegals.”

Romney also released a
Web ad on Jan. 4 that says “McCain supported this year’s amnesty bill.” And even as the debate was in progress, the Romney campaign sent out an e-mail saying, “Sen. McCain Still Won’t Admit He Supported Amnesty.”

We give credit to
Romney for conceding during the debate that the McCain immigration bill “technically” would not have granted amnesty, which dictionaries define as a pardon. But Romney’s denial that his advertising accuses McCain of supporting “amnesty” rings hollow.

Illegal immigrants should go home eventually

Q: Should illegal immigrants be sent home?

A: They should go home eventually. They should have a set period during which they sign up for permanent residency or for citizenship. But there’s a set period where upon they should return home.
And if they’ve been approved for citizenship or for a permanent residency, well, it would be a different matter. But for the great majority, they’ll be going home.

No mandatory prison term for employers who hire illegals

Q: Would you be in favor of a mandatory prison term for any employer who hired an illegal immigrant?

A: Of course not. But here’s what I would do. I’d say once you’ve put in place an employment verification system--and that’s a big phrase to
describe something pretty simple. I’d say to anybody who’s coming here legally, they get a card with their name, biometric information, a number and their work status, and you then say to employers, “If you want to hire someone that’s not a
US citizen with a valid Social Security number, you ask for the card. You then verify it on the computer, and you can hire them if it’s a valid card if they have a card.
If they don’t have a card and you hire them anyway, then you’re going to be subject to the same kind of sanctions you get for not paying your taxes.

FactCheck: Took hard-line on illegals, but only late in term

Romney’s Iowa TV ad portrays Romney’s immigration stance as hard-line compared with Huckabee’s. It’s true that a plan Huckabee supported would have granted in-state tuition rates and eligibility for scholarships to any student who had attended an Arkansa
public high school for at least three years, regardless of immigration status. It’s also true that Romney vetoed a similar bill in 2004. But Romney’s illegal immigrant bashing is of fairly recent vintage.

In 2004, the Boston Globe reported that
Romney was reluctant to veto the tuition proposal--and not at all the certain, sure-footed decision maker portrayed in the ad. At the time, Romney said, “I hate the idea of in any way making it more difficult for kids, even those who are illegal aliens,
to afford college in our state.”

Romney wasn’t a hardliner on immigration until late in his tenure as governor. None of the specifics presented here are false, but the ad presents a black-and-white contrast that doesn’t exist in reality.

Welcome the people who have been standing in line first

Q: The majority are in favor of granting legal status to undocumented aliens if they meet certain criteria. If the majority supports that, why not support that idea?

A: You know, I have the occasion to talk to people who have loved ones that are hoping
to come to this country, to be reunited with family members. And they’re staying in their home countries applying legally. I believe that those people ought to be the first ones to get to come to this country. Those who have come illegally, in my view,
should be given the opportunity to get in line with everybody else, but there should be no special pathway for those that have come here illegally to jump ahead of the line or to be come permanent residents or citizens. They should be treated like
everybody else who wants to come to this country. We’re going to protect legal immigration. At the same time, we’re going to enforce the law, show that we’re a nation of laws, and welcome the people who have been standing in line first.

Employers have no means of knowing who’s legal & who’s not

Q: Some days ago you fired a company that used to take care of your landscaping because supposedly they were hiring undocumented workers. Did you report, officially, the people or the company to immigration authorities?

A: You know, we’re a very
compassionate people. We’re also a people who follow the law. And the landscaper at my home is an old friend, and when he made a mistake the first time, I told him in no uncertain terms, you have to make sure that anybody that works on my property is
legal. And he did his best, but he made a mistake. And apparently, two people he had there were not legal. And we terminated that relationship. And that became a big news story. But employers like this landscape company, and he’s Hispanic American, he
doesn’t have a way to determine whether the people he’s hiring are legal or illegal. That’s why we need an employment verification system to identify the fact that legal aliens that come here are legal, are entitled to work.

Avoid chain migration; disallow families from one citizen

Q: There are still millions of children that were born here that at least have one undocumented parent. Do these children have the right not to be separated from their parents?

A: The Constitution indicates that those that are born here do become
US citizens by virtue of being born here. But if they’re born here from parents who come across the border illegally and bring them here illegally, in my view, we should not adopt, then, these chain migration policies that say, you’ve got a child
here that’s a US citizen, and the whole family can come in. That, in my opinion, is a mistake. We are a nation of laws. We’re going to enforce the laws. We’re not going to cut off immigration; we’re going to keep immigration alive and thriving.
But we’re going to end the practice of illegal immigration. It’s not inhumane. It’s humanitarian. It’s compassionate. We’re going to end illegal immigration to protect legal immigration.

Illegal immigrants shouldn’t get tuition break in schools

Q: [With regards to how MA under your governership allowed sanctuary cities], will you continue to aid illegal aliens?

A: Let me tell you what I did as governor. I said no to driver’s licenses for illegals. I said, number two, we’re going to make sure
that those that come here don’t get a tuition break in our schools, which I disagree with other folks on that one. Number three, I applied to have our state police enforce the immigration laws in May, seven months before I was out of office.

FactCheck: Illegals employed at his home, but by contractor

Giuliani & Romney both stretched the facts when Giuliani accused Romney of employing illegal aliens at his home. Giuliani said, “At his own home illegal immigrants were being employed. So I would say he had sanctuary mansion, not just sanctuary city.”
When asked if he did have illegal immigrants working at his mansion, Romney replied, “No, I did not.”

The fact is, as reported by the Boston Globe in 2006, several illegals worked at Romney’s home in
Belmont MA, off and on over a period of eight years, sometimes working 11-hour days. They were, however, employed by a contractor, and not directly by Romney. So, Giuliani was technically correct to say that “illegal immigrants were being employed,”
since he used the passive voice and didn’t specify who did the employing. Romney could also argue that he was technically correct to say “I did not” have illegals working, since he didn’t employ them directly.

FactCheck: MA state cops never enforced immigration laws

Romney claims in his TV ad that he put state troopers on the trail of illegals in his state. But he didn’t do so until he had less than a month left in his term. He was already considering running for president, and the new governor-elect was expected to
rescind the arrangement.

Romney began talking about giving troopers the power to make arrests on immigration charges earlier in 2006, but he didn’t sign an agreement with the federal government--a necessary condition for that authority to be granted--
until Dec. 13, 2006. Romney was scheduled to leave office Jan. 4, 2007. Democrat Deval Patrick, who had won the race to succeed Romney, had already said the program was a “bad idea” because troopers were busy enough as it was.

Sure enough,
Patrick rescinded the agreement within his first week in office so troopers could “focus on enforcing MA laws.” The policy never had a chance to take effect, because those troopers chosen to carry it out hadn’t yet begun a required 6-week training course

FactCheck: Took no action against 4 Mass. sanctuary cities

Romney promises in his TV ad, “As President, I’ll oppose amnesty, cut funding for sanctuary cities and secure our borders.” Romney might well get tough on sanctuary cities in the future, but he didn’t when he was governor.

During his tenure, at least f
Orleans didn’t officially deem themselves “sanctuaries,” but Somerville affirmed its “long-standing policies in support of all immigrants,” while Orleans forbade city officials from turning in illegal immigrants without probable cause.

We asked Romney’s campaign if he had acted against these cities, but they didn’t provide us with any examples. As far as we were able to determine in our own research, Romney made no attempts to penalize, censure, or cut funding to them.

Reduce federal funding to sanctuary cities

Q: [to Romney]: In recent weeks you have gone after Mayor Giuliani for running what you say was a sanctuary city for illegals. But as governor of Massachusetts, you did nothing to stop Cambridge & Somerville, which proclaimed themselves to be sanctuaries

ROMNEY: Governors aren’t responsible for mayors who are not following the law. And, actually, in my case, as soon as I learned about a program in the department of ICE that we could have our state police authorized to enforce the law, I did just that
so that in sanctuary cities in our state--and nonsanctuary cities--the law would be enforced. But this is a place where Mayor Giuliani and I just simply disagree. I think we should reduce federal funding to cities that call themselves sanctuary cities.
I think saying as he did, if you happen to be an undocumented alien, we want you in New York, we’ll protect you in New York, I think that contributed to 3 million illegals in this country becoming 12 million illegals coming into this country.

Z-visa is not technically amnesty; but is in fact amnesty

Q: [to McCain]: How do you not call the circumstances of comprehensive immigration reform as an amnesty?

MCCAIN: Well, because amnesty, according to the dictionary, is forgiveness. The proposal that we had would require fines, would require back in the
line, would require deportation for some. It would require an enormous amount of time, as long as 13 years, before anyone could even be eligible for citizenship in this country.

ROMNEY: First of all, the Z visa that was offered in that
Senate bill let everybody who’s here illegally, other than criminals, stay here for the rest of their lives. And that may not be technically amnesty, but it is certainly amnesty in fact. [The magnet for illegal immigrants, besides] having amnesty,
is saying to individuals, if you come here and you’re willing to work here and pay taxes, we’ll sign you up. That’s not the right message. We’ve got to enforce the law, welcoming legal immigration, but ending illegal immigration.

FactCheck: NYC never declared itself a “sanctuary city”

Romney continued his criticism of Rudy Giuliani for presiding over a “sanctuary city” for illegal immigrants. As we have noted before, New York City has never declared itself to be a “sanctuary city,” as some cities have. Romney refers to an executive
order Giuliani renewed that prohibited city employees from giving the names of suspected illegal immigrants to federal authorities, unless doing so was required by law or the immigrant was possibly involved in criminal activity.

Source: FactCheck.org on 2007 GOP debate at UNH
, Sep 5, 2007

Make America more attractive for legal immigrants

Immigration that works: “Immigration has been an important part of our nation’s success. The current system, however, puts up a concrete wall to the best & brightest, yet those without skill or education are able to walk across the border.
We must reform the current immigration laws; implement a mandatory biometrically enabled, tamper-proof documentation and employment verification system; and increase legal immigration.”

Legal Immigration: “We need to make America more attractiv
for legal immigrants--for citizens--and less attractive for illegal immigrants. I want to see more immigration, but more legal immigration and less illegal immigration.“

Legal Immigration Strengthens Us: ”I believe it’s important to end illegal
immigration so we can maintain and encourage legal immigration. Immigration is good for this country; it’s helped us over our history. We need immigration to provide some of the skills that we may miss, migrant workers, and cultural advantages.

Priorities: secure border, employer verification, no amnesty

Three Immigration Priorities: “We’re going to have to secure our border first. #2, put in place an employment verification system to make sure we’re giving jobs only to those people who come legally. And #3, for the 12 million already here
we can’t allow them to have a special privilege of being able to stay here indefinitely.”

No Amnesty: “Any legislation that allows illegal immigrants to stay in the country indefinitely, as the new Z-Visa does, is a form of amnesty.”

Border Security is Number 1: “There are three key rules we have to follow. One is we have to secure the border. Two is we have to have an employment verification system to know who’s here legally and who’s not here legally. That’s only fair to the
employers to know who is who. And then, finally, for those people that are here legally today, while it may be fine for them to apply for citizenship, they should do so in line with everyone else and should be given no advantage.

Enforce the law against 12 million illegals here now

Q: What would you do with the 12 million illegal immigrants who are now in this country?

ROMNEY: Well, one is to enforce the law as it exists. The law that was passed in 1986 asked for us to secure the border & said also to put in place an employment
verification system. Neither one of those was done. So let’s make sure that we enforce the law as it exists. And if you want to improve [the McCain reform] bill, take that Z visa and make it temporary, instead of a permanent right to stay in America.

Source: 2007 GOP debate at Saint Anselm College
, Jun 3, 2007

Proposed Z visa allows illegal aliens to stay in America

Q [to Romney]: Sen. McCain has accused you of flip-flopping on immigration. McCain said: “Pandering for votes on this issue while offering no solution to the problem amounts to doing nothing, and doing nothing is silent amnesty.”

ROMNEY: My view is
that we should enforce immigration laws. And this bill, unfortunately, has at least one provision that’s a real problem. It’s the Z visa. It allows people who’ve come here illegally to stay here for the rest of their lives. Not necessarily as citizens;
they have to wait 13 years to become citizens. That’s not the point. The point is, every illegal alien, almost every one, under this bill gets to stay here. That’s simply not fair to get put ahead in the line of all the people who’ve been waiting legally
to come to this country.

McCAIN: Our legislation does account for people who are here illegally, it does have an employment verification system, and it weeds out those who shouldn’t be here, and it gives others a chance to remain in this country.

Make English national language; communicate in Spanish too

Q: You’ve been accused of flip-flopping on immigration. You indicated that you’d want the national language of the US to be English. However, why are you airing ads in Spanish? Your campaign also provides a Spanish-speaking version of your website with
your son also speaking in Spanish.

A: Let me make it real clear--I’m not anti-immigrant. I love immigrants. I love legal immigrants coming to our country. I’m happy to communicate to them, and I hope they vote for me. And I’m happy to have people all
over the country, and I’m going to reach out to them in any language I can to have them vote for me and understand why I’m going to support making this a great land.

I very firmly believe that we have to make sure that we enforce our borders, that we
have an employment verification system, and that those people who have come here illegally do not get an advantage to become permanent residents, they do not get a special pathway. That’s the problem I have with the bill the Kennedy-McCain bill.

McCain’s plan gives special pathway to those here illegally

Q: You have also called Sen. McCain’s immigration plan amnesty. But you said, “Those that are here paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process toward application for citizenship as they would from their home country.”
Why isn’t that amnesty as well?

A: Well, my view is this. People should have no advantage by having come here illegally.

Q: But you’re not telling them to go home.

A: I am going to tell them to go home, but they start by beginning the process of
applying for citizenship or applying for permanent residency. They’re not going to be barred from doing that, but they do not get any advantage by having come here illegally. That’s the key part of what I objected to in
McCain-Kennedy, which said that people who are here illegally get a special pathway. My view, 1) secure the border; 2) have an employment verification system; and 3) say to those that are there illegally, get in line with everybody else.

The 12 million illegal immigrants can’t stay forever

Q: Is it practical to take 12 million people and send them out of the country? A: The answer is no. Here’s how my plan works. One, it says to those 12 million people, they do not have the right to receive a Z visa, which was renewable indefinitely.
That meant these people could stay in the country forever. That’s why talk radio and the American people went nuts. Z visa is renewable indefinitely. Every illegal alien got to stay in the country forever, other than those that committed crimes.

Source: 2008 Facebook/WMUR-NH Republican primary debate
, Jan 5, 2006

Unfair to allow all illegal immigrants to stay

I disagree fundamentally with the idea that the 12 million people who’ve come here illegally should all be allowed to remain in the US permanently, potentially some of them applying for citizenship and becoming citizens, others just staying permanently.
That is a form of amnesty, and that it’s not appropriate. We’re a nation of laws. Our liberty is based upon being a nation of laws. I would welcome those people to get in line with everybody else who wants to come here permanently.
But there should be no special pathway to permanent residency or citizenship for those that have come here illegally. I welcome legal immigration. Of course we need to secure the border. We need to have an employment verification system with a card to
identify who’s here legally and not legally. We need to have employer sanctions that hire people that then don’t have the legal card. But with regards to those already here, it is simply not right and unfair to say they’re going to all get to stay.

Tuition breaks encourage illegal immigration

A bill to let children of illegal immigrants pay the same lower tuition rate at state colleges as other MA residents sparked a political sparring match between Democrats and the Romney administration. Romney chastised critics for advocating a bill he
said would encourage illegal behavior. Romney said the state’s focus should be on helping legal immigrants. Giving children of illegal immigrants a tuition break would act as an incentive to draw in more illegal immigrants to Massachusetts, Romney said.